How an Islamophobic Meme Can Spread Like Wildfire Across the Internet

The apparently fabricated story of a Saudi cleric issuing a fatwa condoning gang rapes in Syria is an object lesson in the pitfalls of breakneck online journalism.

January 2, 2013 |

Editor’s note: On January 2, AlterNet was one of several outlets that published what turned out to be an article based on a false report. We would like to apologize to our readers for the error.

On January 2nd, the story of a Saudi Sheikh issuing a fatwa that condoned ‘intercourse marriage’ or gang rape in Syria exploded over the internet.

According to various sources, Sheikh Mohammad Al-Arifi had stated that foreign fighters in Syria had the right to engage in short term marriages to satisfy their sexual desires and boost their determination to fight against the Assad regime. Syrian girls and women from age 14 upwards were considered fair game and apparently secured their own place in heaven if they participated in these ‘intercourse marriages’.

By the evening a simple Google search of the words, ‘Saudi Sheikh’ , Syrian, and ‘women’ brought up some 5 million references and at least 3 pages of links to articles spreading the news. Not surprisingly there was immediate online uproar too, though as one commentator put it, much of the discussion was about whether these arranged temporary marriages technically constituted ‘rape’. This in itself is worrying.

There was also skepticism from many quarters about the veracity of the report, particularly among savvy Mideast experts. Rightly so. The story, much like the one a few months ago about Egyptian Islamist MPs proposing laws that permitted sex with a deceased spouse up to 6 hours after his/her death, turned out to be a gross lie. Sheikh Al-Arifi has issued a denial via his Facebook page. Over the next few days, the various websites and media outlets that spread the story will no doubt issue their retractions. But the story also raises many questions. For starters, where did it come from? AlterNet inadvertently picked it up from the overtly anti-Islamic Clarion Fund site. Others pointed to the Iranian regime backed Press TV as the primary source on December 31 2012. But the earliest English language reporting comes on December 29 from an obscure YouTube news site called Eretz Zen, tagged as a YouTube channel by a ‘secular Syrian opposed to having [his] country turned into a Taliban-like state.”

What’s extraordinary and depressing is that a slew of websites picked up the story and ran with it, some claiming legitimacy because the other had posted it and clearly no one bothered to do some basic fact checking. Arguably this is just the nature of the net and minute by minute news updates. The story was too sensational to give up. But one would imagine that if a similar story emerged about a Christian cleric or a Rabbi, someone, somewhere would have paused before posting it. Sadly, in the case of stories about Muslim clerics or Islamists the same red flags don’t seem to apply.

Perhaps western journalists are so ignorant of Islam and the cultures in the Middle East that they are willing to believe anything. It’s nothing new — after all Western notions of the East were always immured in sexual decadence and the allure of harems. That was a trademark of the patronizing Orientalism of the past. Today we have a phobic version of Orientalism — expecting and only seeing and reporting the bad and the ugly.

Wow, I totally missed this one--thanks for posting it. This is exactly why Charles and others warn people about posting articles from questionable sites. I'm going to bookmark it for next time someone starts whining about that.

I see most of the usual suspects ran with it. I wonder if they'll print retractions. //

It's the stories that ARE true about prominent Islamic nations that scare me most - blasphemy laws, the widespread desire for death to apostates, virtual slavery of women, egregiously disgusting attitudes toward science, the obsession with limiting free speech to protect the images of those who died 1300 years ago, jailing people for denying the existence of God, "religious police" forces, 'Muslims only' zones, etc.

No need to invent rumors to see the real horrors of the most universally oppressive religion on Earth.

Amazing how a completely accurate comment gets downdings by people who can't recognize the obvious truth in front of their faces. Amazing how many people enjoy religious oppression as long as its in other people's cultures. Very sad.

Amazing how a completely accurate comment gets downdings by people who can't recognize the obvious truth in front of their faces. Amazing how many people enjoy religious oppression as long as its in other people's cultures. Very sad.

It's attitudes like yours that allow the fake stories to gain traction, then take off and fly around the world.

It's attitudes like yours that allow the fake stories to gain traction, then take off and fly around the world.

I bet your attitude is based at least in part on false stories.

What an asshole.

It's attitudes like yours that allow actual atrocities to be given a free pass, and people like you who ignore the real plights of people victimized by tyrants about the world, just so you can smugly sound "culturally sensitive".

It's attitudes like yours that allow actual atrocities to be given a free pass, and people like you who ignore the real plights of people victimized by tyrants about the world, just so you can smugly sound "culturally sensitive".

What an asshole.

The article posted at the top backs my view. What do you have? Links to Robert Spencer?

Amazing how a completely accurate comment gets downdings by people who can't recognize the obvious truth in front of their faces. Amazing how many people enjoy religious oppression as long as its in other people's cultures. Very sad.

You got down-dinged for hyperbolic broad-brushing, not because people here "enjoy religious oppression as long as its in other people's cultures," which is a completely idiotic assertion.

You got down-dinged for hyperbolic broad-brushing, not because people here "enjoy religious oppression as long as its in other people's cultures," which is a completely idiotic assertion.

Islam as a form of governance is a disaster. Asserting otherwise is idiotic. Of course it's broad brushing, but if you think that mainstream Islam around the world doesn't endorse this sort of behavior, you are unbelievably naive.

Islam as a form of governance is a disaster. Asserting otherwise is idiotic. Of course it's broad brushing, but if you think that mainstream Islam around the world doesn't endorse this sort of behavior, you are unbelievable naive.

You're providing perfect examples of defending "stupid". All religions are stupid and harmful, but the way Islam is practiced around large swaths of the world is disgusting, and as it is practiced in many places, Islam is the worst religion on earth. It takes some bizarre mental contortions for a sane person religion that's driven over 80% of its practitioners in many of its most prevalent nations desire death for apostasy is somehow as good as any other religion, and it's a quite idiotic premise to think religions for some reason must 'all be considered equal', and an even more idiotic premise to think religious ideas deserve 'respect' just because they're 'religious'.

And, no, nothing I said is a 'straw man'. Please improve your logic skills, and stop calling other people assholes when you're apparently much better at it.

I saw this earlier. I originally believed the story posted earlier by Alternet that actually supported the claim. I'm so glad they corrected themselves. It's pretty much guaranteed that websites like bigoted Jihad Watch that also claimed that Al-Arifi said this, but I doubt that they'll retract it. Yet another reason to trust websites like Alternet over agenda driven hate sites.

You're providing perfect examples of defending "stupid". All religions are stupid and harmful, but the way Islam is practiced around large swaths of the world is disgusting, and as it is practiced in many places, Islam is the worst religion on earth. It takes some bizarre mental contortions for a sane person religion that's driven over 80% of its practitioners in many of its most prevalent nations desire death for apostasy is somehow as good as any other religion, and it's a quite idiotic premise to think religions for some reason must 'all be considered equal', and an even more idiotic premise to think religious ideas deserve 'respect' just because they're 'religious'.

And, no, nothing I said is a 'straw man'. Please improve your logic skills, and stop calling other people assholes when you're apparently much better at it.

First of all, I'm not the one who called you an asshole. Try to pay attention.

I've neither called you an asshole nor have I said you're stupid, though I did say your assertion that anyone here enjoys religious oppression was "idiotic".

You can belittle my logic skills all you want, but ad hominem attacks aren't going to work because I really don't give a hairy rat's ass what you think of me personally, and others will recognize them from a mile away.

Nice bit of cherry-picking & misrepresentation regarding the Pew report. It was over 80% in 3 of the 7 countries listed, which hardly constitutes "many of its most prevalent nations":

Views of harsh punishments also vary across the Muslim publics polled. Majorities of Muslims in Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan and Nigeria say they would favor making harsh punishments such as stoning people who commit adultery; whippings and cutting off of hands for crimes like theft and robbery; and the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim religion the law
in their country. In the other predominantly Muslim countries surveyed – Turkey, Lebanon and Indonesia – most Muslims oppose these measures.

You now have provided one link for one assertion. You are taking one Pew survey that cites what you call, "over 80% of its practitioners in many of its most prevalent nations" and it turns out to apply only to Egypt and Jordan in your own link. That could be referred to as 'using a broad brush' Is it made out of straw men?

I've done it. You don't find it disturbing that 80% of Muslims in Egypt and Jordan want death to apostates, and you really don't think this has to with the fundamentals of their religion? Sounds like you're the one doing the cherry-picking - seems Islam is only peaceful when it's successfully neutered, much as Christianity has been successfully and fortunately neutered in the West.

I've talked to many Muslims in real life. What they say is not too encouraging. Most hate Israel, don't believe in evolution, and believe in prison time for blaspheming their religion.

You now have provided one link for one assertion. You are taking one Pew survey that cites what you call, "over 80% of its practitioners in many of its most prevalent nations" and it turns out to apply only to Egypt and Jordan in your own link. That could be referred to as 'using a broad brush' Is it made out of straw men?

Did you look at the sample size for those 'national surveys'?

Do you have better data? You don't think 80 million Egyptians, 80% of whom want to kill people for free thought to be disturbing? You think this has nothing to do with the form of Islam they worship?

I stand by what I say - as it stands now, Islam is the most tyrannical and oppressive religion on Earth (something obvious to anyone with their eyes open). People here are (rightfully) quick to demonize the religious right in this country. The nuts in other countries should catch the same flak.

I'm not sure I understand why the possibility that some religions are indeed worse than others is "off-limits thought".

Do you have better data? You don't think 80 million Egyptians, 80% of whom want to kill people for free thought to be disturbing? You think this has nothing to do with the form of Islam they worship?

I stand by what I say - as it stands now, Islam is the most tyrannical and oppressive religion on Earth (something obvious to anyone with their eyes open). People here are (rightfully) quick to demonize the religious right in this country. The nuts in other countries should catch the same flak.

I'm not sure I understand why the possibility that some religions are indeed worse than others is "off-limits thought".

Who said your 'thought' is off limits? Don't like the criticism--don't say stuff people disagree with. Can't back up your assertions--don't make 'em. Stuff like "Islam is the most tyrannical and oppressive religion on Earth (something obvious to anyone with their eyes open)" is a matter of opinion, not fact. Don't expect me to treat it like fact. And the parenthetical phrase is just an insult. So I feel free to call you an asshole, because you are being offensive on purpose, and have been since you first comment on this Page.

I've done it. You don't find it disturbing that 80% of Muslims in Egypt and Jordan want death to apostates, and you really don't think this has to with the fundamentals of their religion? Sounds like you're the one doing the cherry-picking - seems Islam is only peaceful when it's successfully neutered, much as Christianity has been successfully and fortunately neutered in the West.

Well, since you've obviously already decided what I think, I'm going to assume that was a rhetorical question and not bother answering you. Besides, your semi-hysterical hyperbole and obvious hatred of Islam is making you sound pretty pretty ridiculous--it's not conducive to rational, adult discussion.

I've talked to many Muslims in real life. What they say is not too encouraging. Most hate Israel, don't believe in evolution, and believe in prison time for blaspheming their religion.

Really? How many? Five? Ten? Twenty? Fifty? Let's take your microscopically tiny sample and extrapolate from there about all 1.6 billion Muslims in the world.

Sounds like it's you who needs to get out more.

You do realize I've been Muslim for 20+ years, right? LOL

But, hey, what do I know? I'm just the resident apologist. By all means go ahead and continue getting your hate on with whoever wants to deal with you.

Well, since you've obviously already decided what I think, I'm going to assume that was a rhetorical question and not bother answering you. Besides, your semi-hysterical hyperbole and obvious hatred of Islam is making you sound pretty pretty ridiculous--it's not conducive to rational, adult discussion.

Really? How many? Five? Ten? Twenty? Fifty? Let's take your microscopically tiny sample and extrapolate from there about all 1.6 billion Muslims in the world.

You do realize I've been Muslim for 20+ years, right? LOL

But, hey, what do I know? I'm just the resident apologist. By all means go ahead and continue getting your hate on with whoever wants to deal with you.

As for me? This is absurd. I'm done.

I'm pretty amazed at how similar the anti-Muslim and the anti-Jewish talking points are.

Who said your 'thought' is off limits? Don't like the criticism--don't say stuff people disagree with. Can't back up your assertions--don't make 'em. Stuff like "Islam is the most tyrannical and oppressive religion on Earth (something obvious to anyone with their eyes open)" is a matter of opinion, not fact. Don't expect me to treat it like fact. And the parenthetical phrase is just an insult. So I feel free to call you an asshole, because you are being offensive on purpose, and have been since you first comment on this Page.

This. No attempt whatsoever was made to discuss the article and the problem it talks about WRT journalism. It was just a case of someone who hates religion in general seeing an opportunity to bash Islam/Muslims and jumping on it.

I'm just waiting for things to segue into how Islam presents an existential threat to the West and derpity, derp, derp: ZOMG, Eurabia! Creeping Sharia! Jihadis hiding under my bed! Spencer and Geller were right, we're doooooomed.....!

I'm pretty amazed at how similar the anti-Muslim and the anti-Jewish talking points are.

Yeah, it's pretty creepy. I'm much more aware of what I say after having been here for a few years; I'm very careful now not to say "Israel" when I really mean a specific Israeli group or individual, ditto about saying "Jews" say/do/believe a certain thing or act a certain way when that cannot possibly be ascribed to all Jews.

Come to think of it, I try not to inadvertently broad-brush ANY group now, atheists included, no matter how dickishly some of them may behave.

Yeah, it's pretty creepy. I'm much more aware of what I say after having been here for a few years; I'm very careful now not to say "Israel" when I really mean a specific Israeli group or individual, ditto about saying "Jews" say/do/believe a certain thing or act a certain way when that cannot possibly be ascribed to all Jews.

Come to think of it, I try not to inadvertently broad-brush ANY group now, atheists included, no matter how dickish some of them may behave.

And yet we have some people here going on about "right-wing Jews believe in genocide!"

And maybe I should point out to Mr. or Ms. Quark that I am an atheist, and manage not to insult the religious among us, not too often, anyway, I hope.

I don't insult the religious, I insult religions. Bad ideas don't become immune to scrutiny just because you slap the religious "safety label" on to them. If someone wishes to conflate an insult to their religion with a personal insult, that's their own personal problem.

I'm pretty amazed at how similar the anti-Muslim and the anti-Jewish talking points are.

Yes, it IS rather remarkable. This is what makes me fear that the children (literally or figuratively) of the "Ground Zero Mosque" protestors will eventually turn their ire toward new synagogue construction.

Well, since you've obviously already decided what I think, I'm going to assume that was a rhetorical question and not bother answering you. Besides, your semi-hysterical hyperbole and obvious hatred of Islam is making you sound pretty pretty ridiculous--it's not conducive to rational, adult discussion.

Really? How many? Five? Ten? Twenty? Fifty? Let's take your microscopically tiny sample and extrapolate from there about all 1.6 billion Muslims in the world.

You do realize I've been Muslim for 20+ years, right? LOL

But, hey, what do I know? I'm just the resident apologist. By all means go ahead and continue getting your hate on with whoever wants to deal with you.

As for me? This is absurd. I'm done.

Good, now you can go cower in the corner and lick your wounds. Considering your bad behavior here in defending mythology, my opinion of religion has not been improved by you.

And maybe I should point out to Mr. or Ms. Quark that I am an atheist, and manage not to insult the religious among us, not too often, anyway, I hope.

Heh, yeah, I added the "ly" about 5 minutes after I posted it.

You're one of my favorite atheists. Next we're going to hear "I don't hate the religious, I hate religion." Uh-huh, just like Geller says she doesn't hate Muslims she just hates Islam...no wait, radical Islam, no wait....

I don't insult the religious, I insult religions. Bad ideas don't become immune to scrutiny just because you slap the religious "safety label" on to them. If someone wishes to conflate an insult to their religion with a personal insult, that's their own personal problem.

Like this?:

Good, now you can go cower in the corner and lick your wounds.

(something obvious to anyone with their eyes open)

Sounds like it's you who needs to get out more.

Please improve your logic skills, and stop calling other people assholes when you're apparently much better at it.

I don't think you understand what a "straw man" is. Please look up your list of logical fallacies you read from Wikipedia again.

Islam as a form of governance is a disaster. Asserting otherwise is idiotic.

(That one was a complete straw man, making it nothing but an insult.)

Amazing how a completely accurate comment gets downdings by people who can't recognize the obvious truth in front of their faces. Amazing how many people enjoy religious oppression as long as its in other people's cultures.

That's their problem. If one's beliefs in myths and fairytales are so important to him/her that he/she can't take them being insulted without going into a personal hissyfit, that says something negative about them. Just because an idea is "sacred" or "popular", it's not exempt from the commentary it deserves.

I'm crushed I tell you, crushed. I've been put in my place, annihilated by the keen insight and impressive critical thinking skills of a righteous atheist. I'll barely be able to look at myself in the mirror knowing that I was unable to convert him/her into a believer. Whenever I see demonstrations like this I can't imagine why there aren't more atheists //

I'm crushed I tell you, crushed. I've been put in my place, annihilated by the keen insight and impressive critical thinking skills of a righteous atheist. I'll barely be able to look at myself in the mirror knowing that I was unable to convert him/her into a believer. Whenever I see demonstrations like this I can't imagine why there aren't more atheists //

I thought you were "done". And why do you assume I'm an atheist? You shouldn't "paint with a broad brush" like that (LOL).

Well, it's not like Islam (or any other religion) is actually true, so being completely crushed by the overwhelming facts and realities that render your belief system obsolete is something you must be quite used to.

You're obviously a waste. You got your knickers in a twist and can't keep up. You're just mad that you know well Islam, as practiced in huge swaths of the world, has much more serious problems than the other religions of the world, do, and the 'magical balance fairy' in your mind is obviously fussy over it. You'll get over it, no worry.

You're one of my favorite atheists. Next we're going to hear "I don't hate the religious, I hate religion." Uh-huh, just like Geller says she doesn't hate Muslims she just hates Islam...no wait, radical Islam, no wait....

I already said, I hate some religions more than others, though they all suck. Anyone who thinks you should like all religions equally out of some ridiculous attempt at PC ecumenism is an idiot. I evaluate them on their merits.

And why do you assume I'm an atheist? You shouldn't "paint with a broad brush" like that (LOL).

LMAO, referring to ONE person isn't painting with a broad brush.

Well, it's not like Islam (or any other religion) is actually true, so being completely crushed by the overwhelming facts and realities that render your belief system obsolete is something you must be quite used to.

Yeah, I'm pretty used to it. Funny thing is, there are still 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and counting. We're not going anywhere. Deal with it.

Anyone dumb enough to believe in the infallibility or even divine origin of a "holy book" has no business assigning "derp" to anyone. The Quran is so-so, but there's better storybooks out there. Diversify.

LMAO, referring to ONE person isn't painting with a broad brush.

LMAO, yes it is, when you assign traits based on archetypal info.

Yeah, I'm pretty used to it. Funny thing is, there are still 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and counting. We're not going anywhere. Deal with it.

Bye now... *waves*

I'm quite aware Islam will be around a while. Surely such a highly 'reasonable' person as yourself must realize argumentum ad populum is an obvious logical fallacy (but really the only thing practitioners have going for their cause).

Islam, however, is on a very self-destructive trajectory - hopefully it will one day be neutered the way Christianity has been neutered in Western Europe. Then another cult can step up to the plate as the world's most tyrannical faith.

I'm just waiting for things to segue into how Islam presents an existential threat to the West and derpity, derp, derp: ZOMG, Eurabia! Creeping Sharia! Jihadis hiding under my bed! Spencer and Geller were right, we're doooooomed.....!

Nope, won't do it. See how you paint with a "broad brush" again?

Islam poses virtually no cultural threat to the West. It's mostly a threat to the people forced to live under the societies completely dominated by it, and its effect in most (but not all) of those regions is quite malevolent.

I thought this was a thread about Islam? Why are you bringing up the desires of our local Christianist Taliban?

The difference is the "local Christianist Taliban", while a grave concern, are fewer in numbers and inevitably fail to implement their darkest desires on a large scale in today's Western World, unlike their counterparts in majority Muslim nations.

Neither islam or christian fundys pose a threat here in the US , simply due to numbers . Muslims do not cause problems amongst others until their numbers reach plurality , until then they just screw themselves over . I would have greater reservations regarding the christian fundys , for they have backing that can change or make laws , the only protection from them being the Constitution itself . As far as "stories " on the internet ...truth is usually stranger than fiction . Fires are easily started , but in the west no one dies .